The first year of the global 0.5% sulphur cap ‘will be a $72 billion free ride,’ says Trident Alliance steering committee member Poul Woodall.

Speaking at the S&P Global Platts European Bunker Conference, Woodall, who is director, environment & sustainability, DFDS, said 180 million tonnes of marine fuel would have to change from high sulphur products to low sulphur products by 2020, which would result in $72 billion in additional costs.

‘This figure is so big...it’s a significant amount of money for every day you avoid this additional cost,’ said Woodall.

Read the full article here: https://www.bunkerspot.com/europe/44106-global-senior-member-of-trident-alliance-raises-2020-concerns

The Trident Alliance has welcomed IMO’s decision on introduction date of the 0.5% Global Sulphur Cap, but stresses the need for a robust implementation plan.

The Trident Alliance believes that effective enforcement of the Global Sulphur Cap promises to be even more challenging than enforcing the ECA zones currently in effect. For effective implementation, the signatories to Marpol Annex VI must adopt clear legal frameworks, together with a plan to ensure consistent implementation internationally, guidelines for robust enforcement and sanction schemes that are a real deterrent to non-compliance.

“Strong engagement by the IMO member nations on effective implementation of the Global Sulphur Cap is as important as the committee’s decision this week,” said Anna Larsson, Chair of the Trident Alliance.

As part of its decision to adhere to the 2020 implementation date, the MEPC also agreed to discuss measures needed to implement the 0.50% sulphur limit. Those discussions will begin at IMO’s PPR Sub-Committee when it meets in January 2017.

“A lot of work remains to ensure a level playing field for the industry and before the 0.5% Global Sulphur Cap will begin to have the intended impact on human health and the environment. Trident Alliance members will contribute as much as possible in this process, sharing their experience and insights from the implementation of sulphur regulations across the globe,” added Larsson.

The Trident Alliance coalition of 39 ship owners and operators have worked since 2014 to ensure robust implementation of sulphur regulations across the globe.

ENDS

About the Trident AllianceThe Trident Alliance (www.tridentalliance.org) is a coalition of ship owners and operators who share a common interest in robust enforcement of maritime sulphur regulation as a means to ensure fair competition and are willing to collaborate to help bring it about. The Trident Alliance partners with other stakeholder groups, who share the interest in robust enforcement, to work on specific initiatives that support this objective.

The organisations focus is on communication to raise awareness of the issue, supported by compliance transparency measures, as well as on initiatives to foster innovation in enforcement technology.

On enforcement of sulphur regulationsOver the past years, significant steps have been taken to implement regulations to limit sulphur emissions from shipping. Whilst necessary, these regulations pose a significant cost and compliance challenge to the shipping industry. If the regulations are robustly implemented then compliance is the norm and competition is not distorted. However, when enforcement is weak a temptation is created to cut corners on compliance. The result is that regulations will not have the intended effect of protecting the environment and human health. Also, responsible shipping companies are put at a disadvantage relative to those who are intentionally non‐compliant.

September 7, 2016 – The Trident Alliance, a coalition of ship owners and operators working to ensure robust implementation of sulphur regulations, continues to grow with new members Cargill and Fjord Line.

More than 1 year and 8 months after the introduction of the 0.1% sulphur limit in the North America and European ECA zones, the implementation and enforcement of the regulations remain patchy and more ship owners and operators are joining in the work for more robust enforcement of sulphur regulations.

Cargill is one of the world's largest privately-owned companies, providing food, agricultural, risk management, financial, and industrial products and services around the globe. Cargill charters and operates a global fleet of 500 dry-bulk vessels and approximately 60 tankers.

“At Cargill, efficient operations has always been part of our business and we are committed to creating a more sustainable shipping industry. As part of the Trident Alliance, we are pleased to charter vessels that comply with maritime sulphur regulations to reduce our environmental impact and increase efficiency,” says Jan Dieleman, president of Cargill’s Ocean Transportation.

Fjord Line is a ferry and cargo shipping company with 600 employees who operate between Denmark, Norway and Sweden. The company operates completely within the European ECA zone, and today have two vessels running on LNG.

“Fjord Line has been a pioneer with our green innovative strategy by using LNG on our two Cruise and cargo vessels. Joining Trident Alliance we support that all shipping companies shall comply with the new environmental regulations and common actions against those who may not comply to secure a fair competitive business,” says Morten Larsen, CTO of Fjord Line.

The Trident Alliance was founded in 2014, with a focus on improving enforcement of sulphur regulations in ECA zones.

“We have seen an increased level of enforcement activity in several countries in Northern Europe, with some promising development in the area of airborne sensors which would enable monitoring of sulphur levels at sea and not just in port. Whilst these methods have exposed some sulphur-culprits, the legal framework in several countries appears not to be robust enough to bring them to justice,” says Anna Larsson, Chair of the Trident Alliance.

“Even more concerning is the sea of question marks that remain around the introduction of the Global Sulphur Cap. A decision on the date of implementation is expected to take place this October, and it is imperative that the members of the IMO consider how to ensure effective and robust enforcement on the high seas.”

###

More about the Trident Alliance

The Trident Alliance (www.tridentalliance.org) is a coalition of ship owners and operators who share a common interest in robust enforcement of maritime sulphur regulation as a means to ensure fair competition and are willing to collaborate to help bring it about. The Trident Alliance partners with other stakeholder groups, who share the interest in robust enforcement, to work on specific initiatives that support this objective.

The organisations focus is on communication to raise awareness of the issue, supported by compliance transparency measures, as well as on initiatives to foster innovation in enforcement technology.

ENFORCEMENT OF MARPOL ANNEX VI SULPHUR EMISSION CONTROL AREA AND THE INAPPROPRIATE CHARGING OF SHIPS FOR PORT STATE INSPECTIONS

I am writing as Chair of the Trident Alliance, an international coalition of more than 35 ship owners and operators from 12 countries, who share a common interest in robust enforcement of maritime sulphur regulations. This letter concerns Sweden’s implementation of the 0.1% sulphur in fuel requirements that came into effect in the Baltic Emission Control Area (ECA) on 1 January 2015, in accordance with Annex VI of the IMO MARPOL Convention.

The Trident Alliance has been made aware of the policy of the Swedish Transport Agency to charge a fee to ship owners for port state inspections carried out to verify compliance with regulation 14 of MARPOL Annex VI. The Trident Alliance members view the underlying principle of this matter with great concern.

We note that MARPOL Annex VI is a ‘Relevant Instrument’ listed under Section 2.1 of the Paris Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on Port State Control. Accordingly, the Trident Alliance believes that it is not correct for the Swedish Transport Agency to argue (as stated in its notice of 22 December 2014) that such inspections fall outside of the normal Port State Control regime and that ships may therefore be subject to a charge.

Furthermore, the Trident Alliance believes that this approach sets a most unwelcome precedent. Through this practice, Swedish authorities imply that sulphur regulations are not of the same status or importance as the other duties performed by Port State Control – a position we find rather alarming. It is even more damaging when it is comes from a country that is seen as a standard bearer for environmental progress. We already see a worrying level of non-compliance with sulphur regulations in the EU, in particular in the North Sea, and to in this way throw even more doubt over the EU commitment to enforcement of sulphur regulations is not a step in the right direction.

It might even lead other Port States to take a similar approach to the enforcement of MARPOL in general. With the Global sulphur cap on the horizon, the focus on sulphur enforcement as a central part of port state control should be increased and not reduced in importance.

The procedures agreed under the Paris MoU, to which Sweden is a signatory, clearly establish that shipowners should not be expected to pay for PSC enforcement measures, unless they relate to follow-up inspections necessary to confirm the rectification of previously identified deficiencies when a ship has been detained (Paris MOU Section 3.7), or when a ship has been banned from the Paris MOU region (Section 4). This principle is also reiterated in EU Directive 2009/16 on Port State Control (Article 28).

To this end, the Trident Alliance respectfully requests the Swedish Transport Agency to review its policy without delay as this measure appears to be contrary to accepted international practice, the Paris MOU and EU Directive 2009/16.

We fully appreciate the effort of Swedish authorities to ramp up sulphur inspections, and understand that this work requires funding. We are not objecting to the cost per se. But this cost should primarily be carried by the parties violating the regulations through fines, not by the random selection of vessels that authorities decide to inspect. If that is not possible in the short term, the inspection costs could be covered as part of the fairway dues system. This way the shipping community pays for the upholding of the level playing field but inspections can still be handled as part of Port State Control.

The Trident Alliance members fully support the 0.1% sulphur ECA requirements and see robust enforcement as crucial for ensuring compliance across the shipping industry and with that a level playing field, as well as for achieving the health benefits of reduced sulphur levels. We would be happy to start a closer dialogue with the Swedish Transport Agency in order to share our experiences and contribute to stronger sulphur enforcement, and would to that end suggest a meeting between Agency representatives and members of the Trident Alliance Steering Committee at your convenience.

Oslo/London March 15th, 2016 – The introduction of the 0.50% Global Sulphur Cap is drawing near, and discussions are loud around the availability of compliant fuel and whether implementation will take place in 2020 or 2025. Very little attention is being paid to how it will be enforced. The International Bunker Industry Association (IBIA) and the Trident Alliance share serious concerns about the future implementation of the Global Sulphur Cap and are now joining forces to work together on this important matter.

“The 0.1% sulphur limit in Emission Control Areas has now been in place for over a year, and still significant gaps in enforcement remain. However, the enforcement challenges of the ECA zones pale in comparison to what authorities will face at the implementation of the Global Sulphur Cap. Given how critical it is for both environment and business, this challenge cannot be shied away from no matter how difficult it may be to resolve”, says Anna Larsson, Chair of the Trident Alliance.

Chairman of IBIA Robin Meech says: “There needs to be more clarity about the legal framework and the areas of jurisdiction as well as implementation of the Global Sulphur Cap. IBIA will be working with the Trident Alliance to highlight our points of concern with the regulatory authorities and to find a realistic and enforceable solution for both industry and the environment.”

Peter Hall, CEO of IBIA says: “It makes sense on so many levels to join in partnership with the Trident Alliance. We share concerns about the impact that a lack of enforcement will have on society, the environment and a well-founded marine industry. We also share the view that cost of implementation should not impose an unfair additional burden on one or more sectors.”

“By speaking with a united voice we can press for transparent and robust enforcement of sulphur regulations, which will address those that try to evade the system rather than penalise minor transgressions,” Peter Hall adds.

“Together, both IBIA and the Trident Alliance can reach further and be more effective in our work for effective implementation of sulphur regulations”, says Anna Larsson.

Anna Larsson, Chair Trident Alliance and Robin Meech, Chairman of IBIA, at the Trident Alliance members meeting in Copenhagen on March 14.

###

More about the Trident AllianceThe Trident Alliance (www.tridentalliance.org) is a coalition of ship owners and operators who share a common interest in robust enforcement of maritime sulphur regulation as a means to ensure fair competition and are willing to collaborate to help bring it about. The Trident Alliance partners with other stakeholder groups, who share the interest in robust enforcement, to work on specific initiatives that support this objective.

The organisations focus is on communication to raise awareness of the issue, supported by compliance transparency measures, as well as on initiatives to foster innovation in enforcement technology.

For regular updates on sulphur regulations and their enforcement, join the Trident Alliance Group on LinkedIn.

More about the International Bunker Industry Association (IBIA)IBIA is the voice of the suppliers and end users of marine fuel. Conceived in 1992 it has expanded steadily with a worldwide membership comprising shipowners, charterers, bunker suppliers, traders, brokers, barging companies, storage companies, surveyors, port authorities, credit reporting companies, lawyers, P&I clubs, equipment manufacturers, shipping journalists and marine consultants. Today membership stands at over 780 organisations and members from 80 countries.

We ensure that legislators hear the voice of the suppliers and end users of marine fuels. IBIA represents the industry at the International Maritime Organization (IMO) as a consultative non-governmental organisation. IBIA was represented on the Expert Panel in 2007 which reported to IMO about the implications of proposed revisions to MARPOL Annex VI. IBIA attends all meetings of the Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC), Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) and the Bulk Liquids and Gases (BLG sub-committee).

On enforcement of sulphur regulationsOver the past years, significant steps have been taken to implement regulations to limit sulphur emissions from shipping. Whilst necessary, these regulations pose a significant cost and compliance challenge to the shipping industry. If the regulations are robustly implemented then compliance is the norm and competition is not distorted. However, when enforcement is weak a temptation is created to cut corners on compliance. The result is that regulations will not have the intended effect of protecting the environment and human health. Also, responsible shipping companies are put at a disadvantage relative to those who are intentionally non‐compliant.

Enforcement of sulfur regulations for ships operating inside emission control areas in the EU remains too weak and may tempt some to cheat despite increased inspection requirements, according to the head of the Trident Alliance, Anna Larsson.

The Trident Alliance describes itself on its website as a coalition of shipping owners and operators who share a common interest in robust enforcement of maritime sulfur regulations.

While some countries, like Denmark, have an impressive approach to sulfur inspections, the approach is more lax in other countries, Larsson, who is also head of Sustainability at Wallenius Wilhelmsen Logistics told Platts in an interview.

Read the full article here: http://www.sustainableshipping.com/news/INTERVIEW-Trident-Alliance-still-concerned-about-EU-ECA-enforcement-140806

In more and more regions of the world, ships have to change to low-sulphur fuel before being allowed to sail into Emission Control Areas. But how does one make this switch with a gigantic ship? The procedure is more complicated than you might expect.

Insightful article from Hapag Lloyd on the process of shifting from/to low-sulpur fuel, and on the importance of consistent enforcement of sulphur regulations.

Wolfram Guntermann, Director Environmental Fleet at Hapag-Lloyd:

“We support regular and rigorous inspections in all Emission Control Areas. That is the only way we will ­really see a positive impact on the environment.” Shipping companies who consistently abide by the laws and regulations fear that there is far less willingness to take action if there are no inspections. After all, there is a lot of money at stake – low sulphur MDO costs almost exactly twice as much as HFO. That is why Hapag-Lloyd has joined the Trident Alliance.

Read the full article here: http://fathom-ctech.com/news-item/-fuel-switching-the-ship-operators-perspective/29-01-2016/1699/

The practical challenges faced when it comes to enforcing sulphur regulations pale in comparison to the real elephants in the room: Governments within the union who don't attempt to enforce or even transpose the Directives into national law. The Commission is now cracking down on Romania, and it will be interesting to see how the warnings given to France for failure to enforce the Sulphur regulations will be followed up. - Anna Larsson, Chair, The Trident Alliance

Press release from the EC:17 months after the deadline for transposition, Romania has not transposed EU rules on the sulphur content of marine fuels into its national legislation. The Commission is asking the Court of Justice of the EU to impose a fine. The Commission is proposing a daily fine of EUR 38,042.6, which would be paid from the date of the Court ruling until Romania fully transposes the obligations of the Directives into national law. This penalty, proposed by the Commission under the Lisbon Treaty, takes into account the seriousness of the infringement, its duration and the deterrent effect reflecting the ability to pay of the Member State. The final decision on the penalty rests with the Court which however cannot exceed the amount specified by the Commission.

The sulphur legislation aims to reduce the effects of air pollution from sulphur dioxide and particulate matter. Sulphur dioxide is a pollutant mainly emitted by ships. As well as harming human health, the gas damages the environment and contributes to acid rain. Without the Sulphur Directive(Directive 2012/33/EU), emissions from shipping would soon surpass combined emissions from all land-based sources. Air pollution from docked ships is a major concern for many cities with ports in their efforts to meet the Union’s air quality limit values.

BackgroundRomania acknowledged that it has not transposed the Directive on the sulphur content of marine fuels (Directive 2012/33/EU), legislation that was due to be on national statute books by 18 June 2014.

Directive 2012/33/EU amended Council Directive 1999/32/EC of 26 April 1999 relating to a reduction in the sulphur content of certain liquid fuels laying down the maximum permitted sulphur content of heavy fuel oil, gas oil, marine gas oil and marine diesel oil used in the Union. The amendments became necessary to align EU legislation with international standards agreed under at the International Maritime Organisation (IMO), the UN agency responsible for shipping.

Financial sanctionsUnder the Lisbon Treaty, which entered into force on 1 December 2009, if Member States fail to transpose EU legislation into national law within the required deadline, the Commission may ask the Court to impose financial sanctions. The daily penalty payment is calculated based on a formula, where the following elements are multiplied:

– seriousness factor;

– duration of the infringement;

– “n” factor (which varies between Member States and takes into account their GDP);

– a flat-rate amount, which currently is set at EUR 670 per day.

In case the transposition remains incomplete and the Court of Justice of the EU confirms the Commission’s view, the daily penalty would have to be paid from the date of the judgment or a later date set by the Court until the transposition is complete. The final amount of the daily penalty will be decided by the Court, but cannot exceed the Commission’s proposal.

At a recent conference hosted by ECSA and Transprime in Barcelona, Mr Sergio Alda, ProjectOfficer, Marine Environment & Port State Control, European Commission, Agency forMaritime Safety (EMSA) provided an update on the status of sulphur regulation and enforcement. EMSA is the EC body responsible for the actual implementation of Sulphur regulations.

In his presentation, entitled New Sulphur requirements, best practices and the way ahead, Mr Alda drew a picture of the status so far when it comes to enforcement of sulphur regulations. There are a couple of slides in particular that will stand out to those of us concerned with adequate enforcement of Sulphur regulations.

2015 inspections vs requirements

The EC requires all governments in the SECA to perform inspections of at least 10% of the vessels visiting its ports. As can be seen in the above graph, there is still some way to go to reach this objective.

Only 34% of non-compliance cases penalised

Of those cases where carriers were found to have been in violation of the SECA regulations, only 34% have been penalised.

EMSA clearly see that there is more to be done, and in his final slide Mr Alda outlined the key focus areas ahead.